More CWD Positives

[MUP]

MUP, there's 2 contamination discussions going on here- cross contaminating the tissue samples for testing (lymph nodes) and cross contaminating meat.

Contaminating meat will largely depend on how the processor cuts the carcass. If they debone the meat, there should be minimal opportunity for contamination as most of the prions are in parts that would be disposed of anyways.

Contamination can happen if they butcher deer in the traditional pattern of sawing down the length of the spine to split the carcass into 2 sides for easier handling. You can see how this could spread prions onto several other carcasses.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's what I was thinking. Deboning is the key, instead of running thru the saw.

 

[Mike Belt]

Do you guys think this will inflate the price of processing?

 

[MickThompson]

Do you guys think this will inflate the price of processing?

I think it will push some guys to process their own, even though they will spend more than $80/deer on time and materials. I know I don't come close to doing mine for $80 but I know it's mine and done how I want it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BULL MOOSE]

Do you guys think this will inflate the price of processing?

I would think that a processor would collect payment upfront. Any cash only processors may need to re-evaluate their business model to accept credit/debit cards.

Are they going to te additional freezer space to store the meat while waiting on a test result?

 

[MickThompson]

Do you guys think this will inflate the price of processing?

I would think that a processor would collect payment upfront. Any cash only processors may need to re-evaluate their business model to accept credit/debit cards.

Are they going to te additional freezer space to store the meat while waiting on a test result?

I'd say that most down there are already going to a pay up front model. They aren't going to hold the deer to wait on the test, they'll let the customer do that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TheLBLman]

My thinking is that commercial processing costs are going to increase as a result of CWD issues.
They will likely have to keep deer longer in their facilities, and have more customers fail to pay.

As an example, Yoder Brothers (Henry County, TN) lost nearly half their deer processing business in 2018 due to CWD-based regulatory changes. Yoder's has recently begun requiring a significant deposit at the time of drop-off, something they didn't do in the past. Keep in mind Yoder's is not even in the "hot zone" (yet) for CWD!

In the case of Yoder's being near the TN-KY line, apparently about half their deer had been deer killed in KY,
which could no longer be bought across the State Line before processing.

So, not only will CWD issues increase the cost of commercial processing, these issues will result in more hunters processing their own deer. Since processing them yourself is more time consumptive, I believe these same hunters will therefore simply choose to kill fewer female deer, which will adversely effect venison supplied to their non-hunter friends and "Hunters for the Hungry".

Of course, CWD fears will greatly decrease the demand for venison as a food item as well, in turn decreasing desires or needs to kill deer for food.

That said, I do see hunters choosing to kill fewer antlerless deer as
somewhat an off-set to more deer dying from a disease.

 

[MickThompson]

There's definitely an upside to being a processor in the CWD zone all the sudden- any deer killed in TN can be brought to you whole.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[poorhunter]

Not sure if I have seen this Drury podcast/video shared:
https://youtu.be/9DHErarlTiU

Haven't listened to it all yet, but a couple interesting points:

1) while deer have a relatively easy time recovering from an EHD outbreak, no herd has ever recovered from CWD outbreak, and the prevalence rate has only stayed about the same or gone up. This may be only in areas where prevalence got over 15% at some point.

2) herd culling is most likely very effective at slowing the spread. They showed a graph of prevalence in Wisconsin and Illinois, both states having "got" CWD about the same time and both with the same prevalence to start with. Both states started herd culling in hot zones, but after a few years Wisconsin stopped due to hunter outrage. In the ensuing years, Wisconsin's prevalence started to go up dramatically while Illinois stayed the same.

3) once prevalence gets up over 25-30% it's basically over for mature deer hunting.

Thanks for sharing BULL

 

[TheLBLman]

Thanks for sharing BULL

:?:

 

[MickThompson]

Thanks for sharing BULL

:?:

He's referring to "Bull Moose" not saying he shared bulls***.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BULL MOOSE]

Thanks for sharing BULL

:?:

He's referring to "Bull Moose" not saying he shared bulls***.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Several have accused me of that as well!

 

[poorhunter]

:roll:

Thanks for sharing BULL

:?:

 

[poorhunter]

One of the last statements by Dr Grant Woods..."if we don't stop the spread, whitetail deer could very well become extinct, nit I'm my lifetime but maybe my kids' lifetime".

 

[poorhunter]

Missouri has 75 positives in (I think) 31 counties since 2010. Tennessee has 168 positives in three counties in two months.

 

[BULL MOOSE]

Missouri has 75 positives in (I think) 31 counties since 2010. Tennessee has 168 positives in three counties in two months.

Here is a Wisconsin testing report from 2017.

https://dnr.wi.gov/topic/WildlifeHabita ... WIdeer.pdf

 

[DaveB]

Question for the thread: Supposing you were a Wisconsin deer hunter and DID NOT hunt the Southern Farmland area

Would you authorize a complete cull of the Wisconsin Southern Farmland deer herd. Beginning with a cull in a geographic boundary around the area with the 10% prevalence rate and moving towards the opposite border. Objective is to exterminate the disease before it spreads to adjacent hunting regions that show very very low prevalence rates.

Understand, that is very close to what was done in Fayette-Hardeman-McNairy Counties.

 

[fairchaser]

Question for the thread: Supposing you were a Wisconsin deer hunter and DID NOT hunt the Southern Farmland area

Would you authorize a complete cull of the Wisconsin Southern Farmland deer herd. Beginning with a cull in a geographic boundary around the area with the 10% prevalence rate and moving towards the opposite border. Objective is to exterminate the disease before it spreads to adjacent hunting regions that show very very low prevalence rates.

Understand, that is very close to what was done in Fayette-Hardeman-McNairy Counties.

Dr Beth Williams says to cut wider and deeper than you think necessary. The deer will come back. If you do this though, you will stifle a whole generation of deer hunters for many years. In the end, it only slows the spread.

 

[poorhunter]

Question for the thread: Supposing you were a Wisconsin deer hunter and DID NOT hunt the Southern Farmland area

Would you authorize a complete cull of the Wisconsin Southern Farmland deer herd. Beginning with a cull in a geographic boundary around the area with the 10% prevalence rate and moving towards the opposite border. Objective is to exterminate the disease before it spreads to adjacent hunting regions that show very very low prevalence rates.

Understand, that is very close to what was done in Fayette-Hardeman-McNairy Counties.

Dr Beth Williams says to cut wider and deeper than you think necessary. The deer will come back. If you do this though, you will stifle a whole generation of deer hunters for many years. In the end, it only slows the spread.

Yep, in the end (so it seems) it only slows the spread. Since the prions stay around so long in the environment, even killing every deer in an area doesn't eliminate the disease. 20 years later, the herd that replaces the old herd will get it from the environment. Right now it seems the only thing to do is to slow the spread until some smart guy figures out a cure or something.

 

[fairchaser]

It cuts both ways. If you go in and exterminate 100 deer, 70 might be negative and you've angered the hunters paying the tab. You may have temporarily won the battle but lost the war. Just doesn't seem to be worth it. If you could stop it that way it would be worth it but you can't.

 

[poorhunter]

I think the idea is to slow it down so there's still good hunting in areas that don't have it. There will still be deer around, plenty to hubt, just not the numbers of those prized mature deer as we've grown accustomed to lately. At least that's how it seems to me, and I hope I'm wrong.